On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Gregory Williams<greg@evilfunhouse.com> wrote:
>> The problem with the proposed use of conneg is that, as spec'd, conneg
>> is not a way to get a representation of a different resource (query
>> form versus svc desc), it's a way to get a diff representation of the
>> *same* resource... so an HTML form or an RDF form... Or an HTML
>> version of the svc desc or an RDF version. But using conneg to return
>> an HTML form or a svc desc is an abuse of conneg.
>
> Well, ideally I'd like to see a description of the service when I load the
> service URI (bonus points for encoding this in RDFa), but is it an abuse of
> conneg to *also* provide a query FORM on the HTML version?
The purist answer is: No, not if you include an RDF Form in the RDF
version of the svc desc... :>
But I'm not a purist, so I don't think this is a problem.
And "abuse of conneg" isn't the worst of sins, either, though I do
think in this case it's a bad idea.
Cheers,
Kendall